n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Spiess V. Oni (2016) CLR 6(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on June 3rd 2016

Brief

  • Bonafide Claim of Right – When defence of will not succeed
  • Bonafide Claim of Right – Meaning and nature of
  • Criminal liability (Mens Rea) of two offences – Independent nature of
  • Intention - Whether can be inferred
  • Criminal Trespass - What the prosecution must prove to establish
  • Criminal Trespass – Meaning and ingredients of Trespass to land – What constitutes
  • Private defence of person or property – Statutory provisions relating to
  • Self Help – Attitude of court to
  • Section 342 of the Penal Code.
  • Section 60 of the Penal Code Law
  • Section 59 of the Penal Code
  • Section 60 of the Penal Code
  • Section 23 of the Criminal Code
  • Section 433 of the Penal Code
  • Sections 348 and 297 of the Penal Code Laws of Kaduna State

Facts

Mr Job Oni was the complainant before a Kaduna State Chief Magistrates Court, holden at Makera, Kaduna State (trial Court). In his evidence he stated that he knew Mr. Christian Spiess, the accused/appellant, and that he used to work for CONDEM (the accused's company) from time to time as a carpenter. The business of the company, he said, was that of making of satellite dishes sometime in 1999, the appellant was charged before the trial Court as follows:

"Count 1:

That on or about the 18th day of July, 1999 at No. 8 Block 3, Gafai Street, behind Kaduna Textile Limited, Kaduna, you commit (sic) criminal Trespass by entering into the above named premises, then in possession of Job Oni and dismantled a Satellite Dish then in possession of Job Oni, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 348 of the Penal Code.

"Count 2:

That you, on or about the 18th day of July, 1999 at No. 8 block 3 Gafai Street, behind Kaduna Textile Limited, committed the theft of a Satellite Dish by taking it out of the possession of Job Oni and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 287 of the Penal Code.

Appellant pleaded not guilty in each of the two counts. Evidence was taken by the trial Court. At the end of trial, the appellant was discharged and acquitted on count 2 of the charge on ground that the offence of theft was not proved against the appellant. The appellant was however found guilty of the 1st count charge of criminal trespass and was convicted and sentenced to three (3) months imprisonment or two thousand Naira (N2,000.00) fine in the alternative.

Appellant appealed to the Kaduna State High Court on the conviction and sentence handed down to him by the trial Court. After revising the whole case, the High Court exercising its appellate jurisdiction affirmed the conviction and sentence of the trial Court.

Dissatisfied further the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal (Court below). The Court below dismissed the appeal.

Appellant finally lodged his appeal to this Court.

Issues

Whether the Court below was in error in holding that there were concurrent...

Read More